President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 09, 2014 10:03 AM UTC

Banning Red Light Cameras, Anyone?

  • 22 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

red-light-camera

As the Denver Post's Kurtis Lee reports, a bill to prohibit red light cameras in Colorado is gaining some bipartisan momentum:

A proposal introduced in the Senate late last week would bar cities and counties from using automated vehicle-identification systems that pinpoint drivers committing traffic infractions.

Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, has introduced similar legislation the past two years, though unlike in previous sessions, he has strong support this go-round from House and Senate Democratic leadership.

"These cameras just create revenue for cities and don't actually increase public safety at our intersections," said Speaker Mark Ferrandino, D-Denver, the bill's prime House sponsor. "I think we should be focused on making people safe, not raising money." [Pols emphasis]

As Lee reports, local governments are raking in millions in fines from relatively low-overhead automatic camera enforcement at intersections. Not surprisingly, the Colorado Municipal League doesn't like this bill one bit–though they cite the public safety considerations, not the revenue. At the end of the day, money talks: and the badly needed revenue these cameras provide may prove reason enough to keep them with no further debate needed.

What say you, Polsters? Red-light liberty, public safety, or cash?

Tweet
Share

Comments

22 thoughts on “Banning Red Light Cameras, Anyone?”

    1. When red light cameras are outlawed . . .

      . . . only outlaws will have red light cameras?!?

      (Hey, it's your effin' logic — I'm just applying it consistently . . . )

       

  2. Lots of studies…

    This one looks good:

    Crash effects detected were consistent in direction with those found in many previous studies: decreased right-angle crashes and increased rear end ones. The economic analysis examined the extent to which the increase in rear end crashes negates the benefits for decreased right-angle crashes. There was indeed a modest aggregate crash cost benefit of RLC systems.

    So you trade one kind of accident for another. 

    This study from Texas says that there are more effective ways to increase safety;

    The study found that improving signal visibility reduced violations 25 percent. Other changes could net between 18 and 48 percent reductions. Yet they found when the yellow signal was 1 second shorter than the standard ITE timing formula specifies, red light violations jumped 110%. Extending the yellow an additional second yielded 53% reduction in violations, producing the greatest benefit of all the factors studied (2-6).

    When safety is the main concern, preventing crashes is more important than reducing violations. Yellow signal timing again proved most effective in reducing crashes. An extra second yielded a 40 percent collision reduction.

    The study also found that the vast majority of red light camera tickets are issued within the first second a light is red — in fact, the average ticket is issued when the light has been red for half a second or less. Yet right-angle crashes, which account for the majority of red-light related collisions, "with one exception, all of the right-angle crashes occurred after 5 seconds or more of red" (5-16). In other words, tickets are being issued primarily for split-second violations where collisions are not occurring.

    As a cyclist, I'd rather see cars run into each other than run into me. Most people survive car-on-car violence. Car-on-cyclist? Not so much. That said, I'm more interesteed in improved safety than revenue, so whatever works best. 

    1. Indeed. There are many more effective means to increase safety.

      Revenue from red light cameras is consistent and reliable enough to be attractive to municipalities — which says to anyone thinking about it that it doesn't change behavior, e.g. doesn't make anything safer.

  3. Modster will be so sad that he can't call you a "statist". I'm predicting few lefites will be taking up the defense of the red light camera as a lefty/statist battle cry. In general, most people, even lefties, don't like tickets, do approve of being nice to puppies and kittens. Shocking, I know.

    1. I agree

      Also, you can ignore the letters that come to you when you're caught. They have to serve you for it to go to court. So just ignore the letters and for the next 4 months, if someone you don't recognize rings the doorbell, have your spouse answer.

    1. And that's the other side of the coin. Funds have to come from somewhere and the anti-tax fanatics have made funding for all kinds of things we need pretty scarce. I for one, trembling at the prospect of being called a "statist", whatever Modster means by that,  am more than willing to see the demise of red light cams.

  6. A couple of notes:

    If these things are bringing in millions, shouldn't we be more concerned that there are enough people breaking the law to generate said millions?

    Anyone else find it odd that this bill has, after having been defeated numerous times in past sessions, all the sudden picks up steam now only AFTER it was exposed that several legislators – many of whom were caught by these cameras – aren't getting tickets?

    These cameras, as far as I'm aware, are really only at the busiest, most troublesome spots, especially in Denver. From where will the officers be pulled so they can now keep round the clock staffing at these spots? 

    As someone who's had to dart into traffic to get around people who have stopped way over the line, I don't mind people getting a little camera flash for being douchenozzles. 

    To summize – why is this an issue of major public importance? Are people really that pissed off that they got caught breaking the law that they now want to put a law in place to prevent them from getting caught breaking the law? 

    1. Where, oh where were these officers before the advent of red light cameras? And whatsoever shall we do without their constant, all-seeing eye?

      Ditch 'em. ajb shows the data on how to actually reduce intersection issues.

        3. How does the age of the study affect the findings?

          By no means did I do a thorough look through the literature. If you feel there might be newer, better studies, have a look and let us know. 

  7. I got one turning left at Bowles and Santa Fe a few years ago.  The left hand turn signal went red before the through traffic even changed to yellow.  Ridiculous.  I later learned that others complained about it and it was fixed.  I didn't pay the ticket I got in the mail.  After the first letter, I sent subsequent letters back as undeliverable.

    Come get me, Coppers!

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

96 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!